Article

2013-03-24 Home Front: Culture Wars

Bill Repealing Adultery Officially Signed Into Law

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2013-03-24 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11126 views ] Top

#1 ...an outdated 19-century statute.

Actually it goes back much further. However, the hip modern urbanists don't have any need for the the old basis of civilization. BTW, its still covered and acted upon in the UCMJ. If you want to destroy unit cohesion, just let the boys and girls jump beds without consequence.

Posted by Procopius2k 2013-03-24 00:23|| 2013-03-24 00:23|| Front Page Top

#2 Mosaic law, who needs it ?

1.You shall have no other gods before me.
2.You shall not make yourself a graven image.
3.You shall not take the name of the Lord in vain.
4.Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5.Honor your father and mother.
6.You shall not kill.
7.You shall not commit adultery.
8.You shall not steal.
9.You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10.You shall not covet.

[sarc off]

Posted by Besoeker 2013-03-24 00:31|| 2013-03-24 00:31|| Front Page Top

#3 It ain't the elected government's place to enforce those laws Besoeker.

Posted by DarthVader 2013-03-24 00:35|| 2013-03-24 00:35|| Front Page Top

#4 If it's all the same to you, I'd still prefer what remains of our government to actively assist with numbers 6,8, and possibly 9.

Posted by Besoeker 2013-03-24 00:45|| 2013-03-24 00:45|| Front Page Top

#5 1) Disarm the average Coloradan.
2) Repeal Adultery statute.
3) ???
4) PROFIT!!

Posted by badanov 2013-03-24 01:21|| http://www.chriscovert.net 2013-03-24 01:21|| Front Page Top

#6 Almost nobody gets, or at least stays, married nowadays---so what do you need an anti-adultery law for?

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2013-03-24 01:24|| 2013-03-24 01:24|| Front Page Top

#7 Besoeker, #6 in original: lo tirtzach (don't do murder). Killing? Sometimes killing is necessary.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2013-03-24 01:27|| 2013-03-24 01:27|| Front Page Top

Posted by junkiron 2013-03-24 03:39|| 2013-03-24 03:39|| Front Page Top

#9 Killing? Sometimes killing is necessary.

Amen!

Posted by Secret Asian Man 2013-03-24 05:39|| 2013-03-24 05:39|| Front Page Top

#10 I don't know who you re you there....

He doesn't even know who HE is !

Posted by Besoeker 2013-03-24 06:54|| 2013-03-24 06:54|| Front Page Top

#11 For me, enforcing 6-9 are the ones that should be part of gov'ts mandate.

Granted that there are some nuances and definitions and appropriate punishments that need to be firmed up, but, if gov't is going to be involved in any way shape or form in the institution of marriage then gov't should have a say in what happens if you go shtupping around.

The libertarian in me often asks in this day and age if marriage should be purely a religious function with no gov't intervention at all. This would mean no laws of any kind could even recognize the state of being married for any purpose. From 18 on you are an individual and treated as such, period. No tax benefits or penalties no say in whether marriage is two, 10 or 20 people, etc.

Then my rational, historically aware side kicks in and I give up.

Posted by AlanC 2013-03-24 08:17|| 2013-03-24 08:17|| Front Page Top

#12 Good times on the corner of Hickenlooper and Colfax.

Posted by swksvolFF 2013-03-24 10:21|| 2013-03-24 10:21|| Front Page Top

#13 Everybody's against this sort of archaic law until it's his/her spouse caught with his/her pants down.

Posted by Fred 2013-03-24 11:28|| 2013-03-24 11:28|| Front Page Top

#14 The libertarian in me often asks in this day and age if marriage should be purely a religious function with no gov't intervention at all. This would mean no laws of any kind could even recognize the state of being married for any purpose. From 18 on you are an individual and treated as such, period. No tax benefits or penalties no say in whether marriage is two, 10 or 20 people, etc.

All I can say is, the libertarians sure enjoy paying increased taxes for EBT and AIC.

Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2013-03-24 11:37|| 2013-03-24 11:37|| Front Page Top

#15 My great-granddad got caught under a neighbor lady's house by her husband. My great-grandmother got to raise her kids as a widow. The grand jury found the neighbor man justified in the killing.

Posted by Glenmore 2013-03-24 11:40|| 2013-03-24 11:40|| Front Page Top

#16 TFSN,
Two things:
1) when I use libertarian it's mostly a short hand for limited gov't that minds its own business not mine or yours.
2) I know of many AIC things but none that would be relevant, which did you mean?

Three, three questions:
3) since when do libertarians enjoy paying taxes for food stamps? Or, my guess, did you forget the /sarc tag? 8^)

Posted by AlanC 2013-03-24 11:58|| 2013-03-24 11:58|| Front Page Top

#17 Maybe I've gotten the name wrong, AC.

I think I'm thinking of what used to be called WIC.

To be blunt, we're going bankrupt because of the safety net used to support people's alternative lifestyle choices.

Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2013-03-24 12:52|| 2013-03-24 12:52|| Front Page Top

#18 TFSM, (note I typed it right this time)

I'm afraid that you're bluntness only accounts for some of the bankruptcy.

I certainly agree that the safety net is a part of the problem, but I'm afraid that the larger part involves all the dishonest, rentseeking, fascism loving politicians and "business" men seeking to get rich.

The waste of tax funds to feather the nests of the elite has always been the biggest problem. Honestly done with an eye to value the safety net would be affordable.

Unfortunately politicians can't do big things honestly because the temptations for all around are too powerful. That's the problem with big gov't. The bigger the gov't the bigger the rewards for those who can game the system dishonestly. There's a reason that DC is the richest and fastest growing city.

The cockroaches are swarming more now than ever.

Posted by AlanC 2013-03-24 13:31|| 2013-03-24 13:31|| Front Page Top

#19 The only reason some people are alive is because it is against the law to kill them.

Posted by Bill Clinton 2013-03-24 15:13|| 2013-03-24 15:13|| Front Page Top

#20 Re: #9 - I've been told that the hebrew actually says "Don't murder" not "don't kill"....

Posted by Menhadden Chavish3143 2013-03-24 16:11|| 2013-03-24 16:11|| Front Page Top

#21 Now if San Francisco will only repeal the 19th century law prohibiting "unsightly persons" from being on the streets.....

Posted by Thumper Ebbagum6670 2013-03-24 16:12|| 2013-03-24 16:12|| Front Page Top

#22 Re: #9 - I've been told that the hebrew actually says "Don't murder" not "don't kill"....

You were told correctly, Menhadden Chavish3143. :-) Murder being unlawful killing, and all that.

Posted by trailing wife 2013-03-24 18:36|| 2013-03-24 18:36|| Front Page Top

#23 The youth today view God as just some old white guy completely out of touch with the norms of 2013 society.

Pretty much I suspect the same attitude Moses encounterd when he came down from Mount Sinai with the TEN Commandments. The people had revised the laws that governed their society to justify their own sins and lust for the ways of the flesh.

As people today fall away from their faith in God, and the teachings of the Bible, there is great pressure on the new Pope to revise Catholic Doctrine to accept what today has become the norms of modern society.

Moses did not write the Ten Commandments. He was only the messenger.

The Pope has no authority from God to revise Bible teachings or religious doctrine that has stood the test of time for more than 2000 years. He is only a messenger.

I am neither a Catholic nor a devout Christian. But I view it as only the greatest of all hubris that any man would consider himself so all knowing or powerful that he could revise the laws of God or expect the Creater of All Things to adhere to, or accept, a new version of morality.

Posted by junkiron 2013-03-24 18:52|| 2013-03-24 18:52|| Front Page Top

#24 "I view it as only the greatest of all hubris that any man would consider himself so all knowing or powerful that he could revise the laws of God or expect the Creater of All Things to adhere to, or accept, a new version of morality."

You've described the clown in the Witehouse perfectly, junkiron. >:-(

Posted by Barbara 2013-03-24 19:18|| 2013-03-24 19:18|| Front Page Top

#25 Moses emerged with 613 commandments...

Hope you haven't eaten lasagne...

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2013-03-24 19:42|| 2013-03-24 19:42|| Front Page Top

#26 Far better set of instructions for life than the tens of thousands of laws created by man. In NY stay away from 32 oz soft drinks...

Posted by wr 2013-03-24 20:23|| 2013-03-24 20:23|| Front Page Top

#27 Moses emerged with 613 commandments...

Hope you haven't eaten lasagne...

The commandment actually is, "You shall not seethe a kid in its mother's milk," Bright Pebbles. The meat and milk rules developed over two thousand years or so as a way to ensure that no pious Jew accidentally broke the actual law.

Posted by trailing wife 2013-03-24 23:35|| 2013-03-24 23:35|| Front Page Top

23:58 Alaska Paul
23:35 trailing wife
21:51 Water Modem
21:48 Iblis
21:43 Barbara
21:34 Frank G
21:15 Zhang Fei
20:45 Zhang Fei
20:38 Steve White
20:23 wr
20:15 JosephMendiola
20:02 JosephMendiola
20:00 JosephMendiola
19:56 JosephMendiola
19:55 JosephMendiola
19:49 JosephMendiola
19:45 JosephMendiola
19:43 JosephMendiola
19:42 Zhang Fei
19:42 Bright Pebbles
19:36 Redneck Jim
19:35 JosephMendiola
19:18 Barbara
19:06 AlanC